Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T20:28:04.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conditional Cash Transfer Programs and Electoral Accountability: Evidence from Latin America

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Nara Pavão
Nara Pavão*
Affiliation:
Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, Vanderbilt University. [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Do conditional cash transfer programs reduce voters' incentives to hold their government accountable for its performance? Studies show that these programs generate considerable electoral returns for the governments responsible for them. One important and unexplored question is whether these popular programs have also changed the landscape of accountability in Latin America. Survey data from 16 Latin American countries that have adopted CCT programs do not offer support for the claim that such programs have a detrimental effect on electoral accountability for corruption and for the economy. Only in countries where CCT programs do not follow strict rules do beneficiaries attribute relatively less weight to the government's economic performance, but this effect is marginal. These findings fill an important gap in the literature and offer reassuring evidence that cash transfers can alleviate poverty while preserving voters' incentives to exercise electoral accountability in crucial areas of government performance.

Type
Research
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , Summer 2016 , pp. 74 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2016

References

Anderson, Christopher J. 2007. The End of Economic Voting? Contingency Dilemmas and the Limits of Democratic Accountability. Annual Review of Political Science 10, 1: 271–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., and LoTempio, Andrew J.. 2002. Winning, Losing and Political Trust in America. British Journal of Political Science 32, 2: 335–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., and Guillory, Christine A.. 1997. Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: a Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems. American Political Science Review 91, 1: 66–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., and Tverdova, Yuliya V.. 2003. Corruption, Political Allegiances, and Attitudes toward Government in Contemporary Democracies. American Journal of Political Science 47, 1: 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anduiza, Eva, Aina Gallego, and Jordi Muñoz. 2013. Turning a Blind Eye: Experimental Evidence of Partisan Bias in Attitudes toward Corruption. Comparative Political Studies 46, 12: 1664–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arpino, Bruno, and Mealli, Fabrizia. 2011. The Specification of the Propensity Score in Multilevel Observational Studies. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 55, 4: 1770–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baez, Javier, Camacho, Adriana, Conover, Emily, and Zárate, Román. 2012. Conditional Cash Transfers, Political Participation, and Voting Behavior. Impact Evaluation series no. 33. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, Reuben M., and Kenny, David A.. 1986. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51, 6: 1173–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berelson, Bernard R., Lazarsfeld, Paul, and McPhee, William N.. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Blackwell, Matthew, Stefano Iacus, Gary King, and Porro, Giuseppe. 2009. Cem: Coarsened Exact Matching in Stata. Stata Journal 9, 4: 524–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohn, Simone R. 2011. Social Policy and Vote in Brazil: Bolsa Família and the Shifts in Lula's Electoral Base. Latin American Research Review 46, 1: 54–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, John A., and Seligson, Mitchell A.. 2009. The Legitimacy Puzzle in Latin America: Political Support and Democracy in Eight Nations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowler, Shaun, and Karp, Jeffrey A.. 2004. Politicians, Scandals, and Trust in Government. Political Behavior 26, 3: 271–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canache, Damarys, and Allison, Michael E.. 2005. Perceptions of Political Corruption in Latin American Democracies. Latin American Politics and Society 47, 3 (Fall): 91–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, Eric, and Kerr, Nicholas. 2009. Do Voters Have Different Attitudes toward Corruption? the Sources and Implications of Popular Perceptions and Tolerance of Political Corruption. Afrobarometer Working Paper 116. www.afrobarometer.org Google Scholar
Cornelius, Wayne A. 2004. Mobilized Voting in the 2000 Elections: the Changing Efficacy of Vote Buying and Coercion in Mexican Electoral Politics. In Mexico's Pivotal Democratic Election: Candidates, Voters, and the Presidential Campaign of 2000, ed. Jorge, I. Domínguez and Chappell, H. Lawson. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 47–66.Google Scholar
Corrêa, Diego Sanches. 2015. Conditional Cash Transfer Programs, the Economy, and Presidential Elections in Latin America. Latin American Research Review 50, 2: 63–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Charles L., Roderic, Ai Camp, and Coleman, Kenneth M.. 2004. The Influence of Party Systems on Citizens’ Perceptions of Corruption and Electoral Response in Latin America. Comparative Political Studies 37, 6: 677–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De La O, Ana L. 2013. Do Conditional Cash Transfers Affect Electoral Behavior? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Mexico. American Journal of Political Science 57, 1: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De La O, Ana L. 2015. Crafting Policies to End Poverty in Latin America: The Quiet Transformation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Della Porta, Donatella. 2000. Social Capital, Beliefs in Government, and Political Corruption. In Disaffected Democracies: What's Troubling the Trilateral Countries? ed. Pharr, Susan J. and Putnam, Robert D.. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 202–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Cayeros, Alberto. 2008. Electoral Risk and Redistributive Politics in Mexico and the United States. Studies in Comparative International Development 43, 2: 129–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Cayeros, Alberto, Estevez, Frederico, and Magaloni, Beatriz. 2016. The Political Logic of Poverty Relief: Electoral Strategies and Social Policy in Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Duch, Raymond M., Palmer, Harvey D., and Anderson, Christopher J.. 2000. Heterogeneity in Perceptions of National Economic Conditions. American Journal of Political Science 44, 4: 635–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Echegaray, Fabián. 2005. Economic Crises and Electoral Responses in Latin America. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C III, Mitchell, William, and Welch, Reed. 1995. Explaining Presidential Approval: the Significance of Issue Salience. American Journal of Political Science 39, 1: 108–34.Google Scholar
El Espectador (Bogotá). 2010. Familias en Acción y las elecciones. June 15. www.elespectador.com/impreso/articuloimpreso-208607-familias-accion-y-elecciones.Google Scholar
Evans, Geoffrey, and Andersen, Robert. 2006. The Political Conditioning of Economic Perceptions. Journal of Politics 68, 1: 194–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Geoffrey, and Pickup, Mark. 2010. Reversing the Causal Arrow: the Political Conditioning of Economic Perceptions in the 2000–2004 U.S. Presidential Election Cycle. Journal of Politics 72, 4: 1236–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Vázquez, Pablo, Barberá, Pablo, and Rivero, Gonzalo. 2015. Rooting out Corruption or Rooting for Corruption? the Heterogeneous Electoral Consequences of Scandals. Political Science Research and Methods. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9876933&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S2049847015000084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraz, Claudio, and Finan, Frederico. 2008. Exposing Corrupt Politicians: the Effects of Brazil's Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes. Quarterly Journal of Economics 123, 2: 703–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fossati, Diego. 2014. Economic Vulnerability and Economic Voting in 14 Oecd Countries. European Journal of Political Research 53, 1: 116–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, Brian J. 2012. Distributive Politics and Conditional Cash Transfers: the Case of Brazil's Bolsa Família. World Development 40, 5: 1042–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funk, Carolyn L., and García-Monet, Patricia A.. 1997. The Relationship between Personal and National Concerns in Public Perceptions about the Economy. Political Research Quarterly 50, 2: 317–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsberg, Benjamin, and Weissberg, Robert. 1978. Elections and the Mobilization of Popular Support. American Journal of Political Science 22, 1: 31–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimes, Marcia, and Wängnerud, Lena. 2010. Curbing Corruption through Social Welfare Reform? the Effects of Mexico's Conditional Cash Transfer Program on Good Government. American Review of Public Administration 40, 6: 671–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hellwig, Timothy T. 2001. Interdependence, Government Constraints, and Economic Voting. Journal of Politics 63, 4: 1141–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ho, Daniel, Kosuke Imai, Gary King, and Stuart, Elizabeth. 2007. Matching as Nonparametric Preprocessing for Reducing Model Dependence in Parametric Causal Inference. Political Analysis 15: 199–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, Wendy, and Sugiyama, Natasha Borges. 2014. Transforming Subjects into Citizens: Insights from Brazil's Bolsa Família. Perspectives on Politics 12, 4: 829–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, Wendy, and Power, Timothy J.. 2007. Rewarding Lula: Executive Power, Social Policy, and the Brazilian Elections of 2006. Latin American Politics and Society 49, 1 (Spring): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iacus, Stefano M., King, Gary, and Porro, Giuseppe. 2009. Cem: Software for Coarsened Exact Matching. Journal of Statistical Software 30: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, Donald R. 1998. Opinion and Action in the Realm of Politics. In The Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. Gilbert, Daniel Todd, Fiske, Susan T., and Lindzey, Gardner. London: Oxford University Press. 778–867.Google Scholar
Layton, Matthew, and Smith, Amy Erica. 2011. Social Assistance Policies and the Presidential Vote in Latin America. AmericasBarometer Insights 66.Google Scholar
León, Mariana. 2013. Se disputan adultos mayores Pri y Prd. El Universal (Mexico City), June 23.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S., and Ratto, Maria Celeste. 2013. Economic Voting in Latin America: a General Model. Electoral Studies 32, 3: 489–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Licio, Elaine Cristina, Rennó, Lucio R., and Henrique Carlos de, O. de Castro. 2009. Bolsa Família e voto na eleição presidencial de 2006: em busca do elo perdido. Opinião Pública 15, 1: 31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindert, Kathy, and Vincensini, Vanina. 2010. Social Policy, Perceptions, and the Press: an Analysis of the Media's Treatment of Conditional Cash Transfers in Brazil. Social Protection Discussion Paper 1008. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Manacorda, Marco, Edward Miguel, and Vigorito, Andrea. 2011. Government Transfers and Political Support. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 3, 3: 1–28.Google Scholar
Manzetti, Luigi, and Wilson, Carole J.. 2007. Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support? Comparative Political Studies 40, 8: 949–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzetti, Luigi, and Rosas, Guillermo. 2015. The Varying Toll of Corruption Perceptions on pro-Incumbent Vote Choice in Latin America. In The Latin American Voter, ed. Carlin, Ryan, Singer, Matthew, and J. Zechmeister, Elizabeth. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 300–323.Google Scholar
Markus, Gregory B. 1988. The Impact of Personal and National Economic Conditions on the Presidential Vote: a Pooled Cross-Sectional Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 32, 1: 137–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matoso, Felipe. 2014. Bolsa Família está na moda e não tem quem fale contra, diz ministra. Globo.com, June 5. http://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/2014/06/bolsa-familia-esta-na-moda-e-nao-tem-quem-fale-contra-diz-ministra.html.Google Scholar
McCormick, Meghan P., O'Connor, Erin E., Cappella, Elise, and McClowry, Sandee G.. 2013. Teacher-child Relationships and Academic Achievement: a Multilevel Propensity Score Model Approach. Journal of School Psychology 51, 5: 611–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milenio (Mexico City). 2013. Dejar atrás paternalismo de oportunidades, pide Robles. July 1. www.milenio.com/politica/Dejar-paternalismo-Oportunidades-pide-Robles_0_108589455.html.Google Scholar
Molina Díaz, Miguel. 2012. El bono de la discordia. La Republica (Quito), November 24. www.larepublica.ec/blog/opinion/2012/11/24/el-bono-de-la-discordia/ Google Scholar
Morris, Stephen D. 1991. Corruption and Politics in Contemporary Mexico. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Morris, Stephen D., and Klesner, Joseph L.. 2010. Corruption and Trust: Theoretical Considerations and Evidence from Mexico. Comparative Political Studies 43, 10: 1258–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadeau, Richard, and Blais, Andre. 1993. Accepting the Election Outcome: the Effect of Participation on Losers’ Consent. British Journal of Political Science 23, 4: 553–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, J. S. 1967. Corruption and Political Development: a Cost-Benefit Analysis. American Political Science Review 61, 2: 417–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odugbemi, Sina, and Lee, Taeku, eds. 2011. Accountability Through Public Opinion: From Inertia to Public Action. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Pacek, Alexander C., and Radcliff, Benjamin. 1995. Economic Voting and the Welfare State: a Cross-National Analysis. Journal of Politics 57, 1: 44–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, John W. 1976. Task Complexity and Contingent Processing in Decision Making: an Information Search and Protocol Analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 16, 2: 366–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Portal Brasil. 2015. Bolsa Família complementa a renda de 14 milhões de famílias em dezembro. December 12. www.brasil.gov.br/cidadania-e-justica/2015/12/bolsa-familia-complementa-a-renda-de-14-milhoes-de-familias-em-dezembro Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam, Susan Stokes, C., and Manin, Bernard, eds. 1999. Democracy, Accountability, and Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rawlings, Laura B. 2004. A New Approach to Social Assistance: Latin America's Experience with Conditional Cash Transfer Programs. Social Protection Discussion Paper series, no. 0416. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Rawlings, Laura B., and Rubio, Gloria M.. 2005. Evaluating the Impact of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs. World Bank Research Observer 20, 1: 29–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redlawsk, David P. 2004. What Voters Do: Information Search during Election Campaigns. Political Psychology 25, 4: 595–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Remmer, Karen L. 1991. The Political Impact of Economic Crisis in Latin America in the 1980s. American Political Science Review 85, 3: 777–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosas, Guillermo, and Manzetti, Luigi. 2015. Reassessing the Trade-off Hypothesis: How Misery Drives the Corruption Effect on Presidential Approval. Electoral Studies 39: 26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rundquist, Barry S., Strom, Gerald S., and Peters, John G.. 1977. Corrupt Politicians and Their Electoral Support: Some Experimental Observations. American Political Science Review 71, 3: 954–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schedler, Andreas. 2000. The Democratic Revelation. Journal of Democracy 11, 4: 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seligson, Mitchell A. 2002. The Impact of Corruption on Regime Legitimacy: a Comparative Study of Four Latin American Countries. Journal of Politics 64, 2: 408–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seligson, Mitchell A. 2006. The Measurement and Impact of Corruption Victimization: Survey Evidence from Latin America. World Development 34, 2: 381–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semana, (Bogotá). 2008. Familias en Acción y Sisben por votos. June 6. www.semana.com/on-line/articulo/familias-accion-sisben-votos/93101-3.Google Scholar
Semana, (Bogotá). 2010. Dudas en acción. June 12. www.semana.com/nacion/articulo/dudas-accion/117911-3 Google Scholar
Singer, Matthew M. 2011a. Economic Voting and Welfare Programmes: Evidence from the American States. European Journal of Political Research 50, 4 (June): 479–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, Matthew M. 2011b. Who Says “It's the Economy”? Cross-National and Cross-Individual Variation in the Salience of Economic Performance. Comparative Political Studies 44, 3 (March): 284–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, Matthew M. 2013. Economic Voting in an Era of Non-Crisis: the Changing Electoral Agenda in Latin America, 1982–2010. Comparative Politics 45, 2 (January): 169–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soares, Fábio Veras, Rafael, Pérez Ribas, and Osorio, Rafael Guerreiro. 2010. Evaluating the Impact of Brazil's Bolsa Família: Cash Transfer Programs in Comparative Perspective. Latin American Research Review 45, 2: 173–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soares, , Dillon, Gláucio Ary, and Terron, Sonia Luiza. 2008. Dois Lulas: a geografia eleitoral da reeleição (explorando conceitos, métodos e técnicas de análise geoespacial). Opinião Pública 14, 2: 269–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugiyama, , Borges, Natasha, and Hunter, Wendy. 2013. Whither Clientelism? Good Governance and Brazil's Bolsa Família Program. Comparative Politics 46, 1 (October): 43–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taber, Charles, and Young, Everett. 2011. Information Processing, Public Opinion, and Accountability. In Odugbemi and Lee 2011. 95–122.Google Scholar
Thoemmes, Felix, and West, Stephen G.. 2011. The Use of Propensity Scores for Nonrandomized Designs with Clustered Data. Multivariate Behavioral Research 46: 514–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weyland, Kurt G. 1998. The Politics of Corruption in Latin America. Journal of Democracy 9, 2: 108–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winters, Matthew S. 2010. Exploring Changes over Time in the Targeting of a Cash Transfer Program in Ecuador. Paper presented at the 2010 Midwest Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, April 6.Google Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 2005. On the Salience of Political Issues: the Problem with “Most Important Problem.” Electoral Studies 24, 4: 555–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher, Mark Franklin, and Twiggs, Daniel. 1997. Economic Perceptions and Vote Choice: Disentangling the Endogeneity. Political Behavior 19, 1: 7–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, Amery, and Zumbo, Bruno. 2008. Understanding and Using Mediators and Moderators. Social Indicators Research 87, 3: 367–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zechmeister, Elizabeth J., and Zizumbo-Colunga, Daniel. 2013. The Varying Political Toll of Concerns about Corruption in Good versus Bad Economic times. Comparative Political Studies 46, 10 (October): 1190–1218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucco, Cesar. 2008. The President's “New” Constituency: Lula and the Pragmatic Vote in Brazil's 2006 Presidential Elections. Journal of Latin American Studies 40, 1: 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucco, Cesar. 2013. When Pay Outs Pay off: Conditional Cash-Transfers and Voting Behavior in Brazil, 2002–2010. American Journal of Political Science 57, 4: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucco, Cesar, and Power, Timothy. 2012. Bolsa Família and the Shift in Lula's Electoral Base, 2002–2006. SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2025680. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Pavão supplementary material

Appendices

Download Pavão supplementary material(File)
File 199.1 KB